B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above sentence against Defendant B for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Defendant

B On January 21, 2015, the Seoul Central District Court was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for six months for fraud, and the judgment was finalized on August 29, 2015.

Defendant

B around April 6, 2011, at the office located in 1218, the 12th floor of the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G Building No. 1218, which was opened by the victim F, borrowed money from the victim F, it is difficult to lend money only because the victim was under the progress of the International Hotel Construction Corporation in Ulllledo H, and there is no additional value-added tax payment.

When indicating dial color, the victim "Sungdo Corporation" is not able to see the victim.

In addition, if the Corporation is located in Vietnam and it lends 24 million won to it, it will be repaid with the previous loan of 30 million won.

Only one week shall be used and returned.

“A false statement” was made.

However, in fact, Defendant B did not have an intent or ability to pay the amount of money borrowed from the damaged party until the due date when it was promised to attract investors by using the money received from the damaged party as expenses, but did not have been promised to receive an investment and did not receive an investment from the investors.

Nevertheless, Defendant B deceivings the victim as above and transferred KRW 24 million to the account in the name of Defendant B’s father on the same day from the victim.

Accordingly, Defendant B acquired 24 million won from the injured party.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant B's partial statement

1. The portion of the statement of the witness F in the fourth public trial record;

1. Details of passbook transactions;

1. Status of individual entry or departure;

1. Previous Records: A copy of the inquiry about criminal history, the search for the Komnet case, and the text of the judgment [Defendant B has already become final and conclusive at the time of borrowing money from the damaged party, and thus could have immediately repaid the money to the injured party, so there was no intention to commit the crime of defraudation. However, at the time of borrowing money from the damaged party, the so-called "beetnam Project" is deemed to be the case.